Musings on World events from the perspective of a Social and an Economic Liberal.

Thursday, April 13, 2006

10 Liberal Texts

Iain Dale put down some thoughts on his blog as to what the 10 key texts of Conservatism were. I was interested to see that several Conservatives tried to claim Liberal thinkers, such as JS Mill, as Conservative.

My own choice for Liberalism would be (in no particular order):

JS Mill: On LibertyFA Hayek: The Constitution of LibertyKarl Popper: The Open Society and its EnemiesJohn Locke: Second Treatise on Civil GovernmentVoltaire: Essay on the Manner and Spirit of Nations and on the Principal Occurrences in HistoryRousseau: The Social Contractvon Humboldt: On the limits of State ActionIsaiah Berlin: Two concepts of LibertyJames Madision/Alexander Hamilton: The Federalist PapersDavid Hume: A Treatise on Human Nature

Probably various others such as Aristotle's Politics or Joseph Steiglitz' Globalisation and its Discontents, should be included- please leave your ideas...

6 comments:

I actually can't understand why so many liberals seem to think that Rousseau was a liberal. Indeed, Rousseau said in the footnotes of the Social Contract that "In Genoa, the word, libertas, can be read on the front of prisons and on the fetters of galley‐slaves. The application of this motto is fine and just."

Probably one reason why so many make the mistake to take Rousseau as liberal is because his book was called "the Social contract". However, it wasn't the first time that the idea of a social contract was introduced, and not all the social contract models are liberal. Rousseau's certainly wasn't, and he has inspired and appealed to later socialists, communists, anarchists, fascists, populists and the modern greens - almost everybody except the liberals.

The most important political thoughts of Voltaire were presented in his contribution to the Encyclopédie, but as there were other (also less liberal) contributors and the whole book isn't about political theory, I'd mention "A Treatise on Toleration" as a good example of his contribution to liberalism.

Though James Madison was clearly a liberal, his co-authors of the Federalist Papers, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, are usually regarded as conservatives.

David Hume was a great philosopher, but don't you think that his contribution to the political philosophy was somewhat modest, and "A Treatise on Human Nature" was hardly about liberalism?

I think there are some essential texts you have missed (here in chronological order):

Adam Smith: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of NationsImmanuel Kant: On the common saying: this may be true in theory but it does not apply in practice (OR: Theory and Practice)Frédéric Bastiat: The LawRobert Nozick: Anarchy, State, and Utopia

Aristotle was rather conservative, supporting for instance slavery unlike some more radical but less known thinker of his time. But of course he was less socialist than Plato, which probably why many liberals would like to adopt him as a liberal. However, I recall that Popper mentioned some more liberal thinkers from the classical period in the Open Society and its Enemies.

As for Stiglitz, if you'll add him, you might want to mention also some books of Peter Thomas Bauer,Jagdish Bhagwati and Hernando de Soto.

I must say I do have reservations about Rousseau, but I included him since teh main thrust of the Social Contract is what the state may not do, and this was one of my definitions of Liberal. As for David Hume, although I agree, he is more of a moral philosopher, one can see empiricism and utilitarianism as major features in his work. Smith and Kant I also concur are in the Liberal school, but in limiting my list to 10- and assuming that Smith is regarded with approval by most political schools (Marxists aside), but I will happily claim him as a Liberal. Bastiat was a forerunner of the Austrian school, but I did not consider him to be top 10. Nozick is usually considered "anarcho-capitalist" as much as Liberal, but in any event he lacks the Ciceronian moderation that I was also looking for in my classification.

Arguably including Aristotle is an anachronism, but I often find myself using Aristotilian definitions, and I wanted to use him as an intellectual contrast to Plato, whose influence can be seen in many anti-Liberal philosophers.

As for Bauer- certainly a friend of Hayek, but not, I submit as significant. I do approve of Jagdish Bhagwati- especially "In defence of globalization". Hernando de Soto is a more controversial figure who while he clearly has a liberal inspiration, I think is not of sufficient stature to be included.

"Nozick is usually considered "anarcho-capitalist" as much as Liberal,...

That's a common mistake, made by people I suspect have not read his book Anarchy, State and Utopia, and are judging him by the name of the book. However, in the first part of his book, Anarchy, he starts, like John Locke, from a state of nature (anarchy) and tries to show how a state can rise from it without violating the rights of individuals. It is sometimes disputed whether he succeeded, but he can't by any means be described an "anarcho-capitalist".

In the second part of the book, State he tries to define the limits of the state, and ends in supporting a minimal state, or a night-watchman state, as it is also called. This makes him a minarchist, which is mutually exclusive with anarcho-capitalism.

In the third part, Utopia, he introduces his vision, a framework of utopia, where people within a minimal state could set up their own communities, where they could practise their own ideals, even socialism (of course as long as the membership of these communities would be voluntary).